Why We’re Losing the War on Terror

Everyone knows that only Muslim-lovers and left-wing peaceniks want to stop the wars in Afghanistan and other Muslim countries, that terrorism is caused by Muslim ideology, and that we’re fighting them “over there” so we don’t have to fight them here.

Right?

In fact, as University of Chicago professor Robert A. Pape – who specializes in international security affairs – points out:

Extensive research into the causes of suicide terrorism proves Islam isn’t to blame — the root of the problem is foreign military occupations.

Wait, what? That can’t be right!

But as Pape explains:

Each month, there are more suicide terrorists trying to kill Americans and their allies in Afghanistan, Iraq, and other Muslim countries than in all the years before 2001 combined.

***

New research provides strong evidence that suicide terrorism such as that of 9/11 is particularly sensitive to foreign military occupation, and not Islamic fundamentalism or any ideology independent of this crucial circumstance. Although this pattern began to emerge in the 1980s and 1990s, a wealth of new data presents a powerful picture.

More than 95 percent of all suicide attacks are in response to foreign occupation, according to extensive research [co-authored by James K. Feldman – former professor of decision analysis and economics at the Air Force Institute of Technology and the School of Advanced Airpower Studies] that we conducted at the University of Chicago’s Project on Security and Terrorism, where we examined every one of the over 2,200 suicide attacks across the world from 1980 to the present day. As the United States has occupied Afghanistan and Iraq, which have a combined population of about 60 million, total suicide attacks worldwide have risen dramatically — from about 300 from 1980 to 2003, to 1,800 from 2004 to 2009. Further, over 90 percent of suicide attacks worldwide are now anti-American. The vast majority of suicide terrorists hail from the local region threatened by foreign troops, which is why 90 percent of suicide attackers in Afghanistan are Afghans.

Israelis have their own narrative about terrorism, which holds that Arab fanatics seek to destroy the Jewish state because of what it is, not what it does. But since Israel withdrew its army from Lebanon in May 2000, there has not been a single Lebanese suicide attack. Similarly, since Israel withdrew from Gaza and large parts of the West Bank, Palestinian suicide attacks are down over 90 percent.

Some have disputed the causal link between foreign occupation and suicide terrorism, pointing out that some occupations by foreign powers have not resulted in suicide bombings — for example, critics often cite post-World War II Japan and Germany. Our research provides sufficient evidence to address these criticisms by outlining the two factors that determine the likelihood of suicide terrorism being employed against an occupying force.

The first factor is social distance between the occupier and occupied. The wider the social distance, the more the occupied community may fear losing its way of life. Although other differences may matter, research shows that resistance to occupations is especially likely to escalate to suicide terrorism when there is a difference between the predominant religion of the occupier and the predominant religion of the occupied.

Religious difference matters not because some religions are predisposed to suicide attacks. Indeed, there are religious differences even in purely secular suicide attack campaigns, such as the LTTE (Hindu) against the Sinhalese (Buddhists).

Rather, religious difference matters because it enables terrorist leaders to claim that the occupier is motivated by a religious agenda that can scare both secular and religious members of a local community — this is why Osama bin Laden never misses an opportunity to describe U.S. occupiers as “crusaders” motivated by a Christian agenda to convert Muslims, steal their resources, and change the local population’s way of life.

The second factor is prior rebellion. Suicide terrorism is typically a strategy of last resort, often used by weak actors when other, non-suicidal methods of resistance to occupation fail. This is why we see suicide attack campaigns so often evolve from ordinary terrorist or guerrilla campaigns, as in the cases of Israel and Palestine, the Kurdish rebellion in Turkey, or the LTTE in Sri Lanka.

One of the most important findings from our research is that empowering local groups can reduce suicide terrorism. In Iraq, the surge’s success was not the result of increased U.S. military control of Anbar province, but the empowerment of Sunni tribes, commonly called the Anbar Awakening, which enabled Iraqis to provide for their own security. On the other hand, taking power away from local groups can escalate suicide terrorism. In Afghanistan, U.S. and Western forces began to exert more control over the country’s Pashtun regions starting in early 2006, and suicide attacks dramatically escalated from this point on.

***

The first step is recognizing that occupations in the Muslim world don’t make Americans any safer — in fact, they are at the heart of the problem.

But surely Pape and his team of University of Chicago researchers are wrong. Surely other security experts disagree, right?

No.

The top security experts – conservative hawks and liberal doves alike – agree that waging war in the Middle East weakens national security and increases terrorism. See this, this, this, this, this and this.

As one of the top counter-terrorism experts (the former number 2 counter-terrorism expert at the State Department) told me, starting wars against states which do not pose an imminent threat to America’s national security increases the threat of terrorism because:

One of the principal causes of terrorism is injuries to people and families.

(Take another look at the painting above).

And its not only war in general as an abstract concept. The methods we’re using to wage war are increasing terrorism.

That doesn’t change the fact that the religion is based off of a man who was a warlord, slave owner, polygamist, murderer, thief, and pedophile. The tenets of the religion are very dangerous to freedom- most specifically because of the abrogation clause which says that everything that came after is as good if not better than what came before. Mohammad was peaceful in Mecca, but then as he finally became political and militarized once he recruited the poor- his message turned increasingly violent. While I agree 100% that we have no business being over there and this is contributing to instability abroad….
Islam is a very dangerous religion yet both parties continue to echo the false notion that religion is peaceful.

Do they not research? The very name Islam means “submission to Allah” and the only time peace will be achieved in that religion is when Islam conquers the world. Right…just take a look at the countries where Islam runs the show. its nasty and rife with inequality for women and infidels ie. jews, christians, gays (which is ironic considering that many muslim men sleep with young boys to this day)

I really wish people would wake up to the truth that Islam is more than a religion, its a political and military system based on subjugating women and non-believers.

Luke The Hawk niss

Faith has caused the death of billions and trillions of people throughout all of human civilization. At their core, there are good teachings of peace, but MAN twists them into their own use. Radical Islam is far different than a moderate or peaceful sect with wildly varying views. But, it is not alone, Christianity and Judiasm have their radicals sects as well, believing that ‘god’ tells them to go to war or occupy.
What you say doesn’t change the fact that misguided faith in Christianity and ‘Manifest Destiny’ nearly made Native Americans extinct, because of their beliefs and culture were different.

Luke The Hawk niss

Faith has caused the death of billions and trillions of people throughout all of human civilization. At their core, there are good teachings of peace, but MAN twists them into their own use. Radical Islam is far different than a moderate or peaceful sect with wildly varying views. But, it is not alone, Christianity and Judiasm have their radicals sects as well, believing that ‘god’ tells them to go to war or occupy.
What you say doesn’t change the fact that misguided faith in Christianity and ‘Manifest Destiny’ nearly made Native Americans extinct, because of their beliefs and culture were different.

Luke The Hawk niss

That’s exactly WHY they want the ‘war on terror’ to continue. If you breed terror, then you have something to go to war with. War SELLS and people are being fooled into this cycle, while thousands, millions are made to suffer. A child’s life is literally worth less than a barrel of oil.
The U.S. is already getting caught funding Terorists in Syria and Pakistan. It is hyprocrisy at its finest.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of political, economic, scientific, and educational issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: